If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

"Virat Kohli reminds me a lot of Viv Richards" : Michael Holding

In an interview, former West Indian fast-bowler turned commentator Michael Holding analysed the ongoing Test series between England and India, discussed the reasons behind England's batting struggles, explained why India's fast-bowlers have impressed one and all, expressed his concerns about the future of Test cricket and spoke about his impressions of Indian captain Virat Kohli and all-rounder Hardik Pandya.

PakPassion.net: Alastair Cook has been struggling of late, do you think we are seeing the end of a brilliant international career?

Michael Holding: It's difficult to remove Alastair Cook when you don't have much in the locker in terms of replacements. If they had people knocking on the door and doing well then that would be a different matter. Alastair Cook has been a constant in the England team for many years and many different people have been tried to open with him, so if they can't find a partner for Alastair Cook, then I don't see how they can find a replacement for Cook. That would mean the selectors finding two new openers.

PakPassion.net: England's batting in the Tests this summer has come in for some criticism. What do you make of their approach and struggles?

Michael Holding: The batting has not been anywhere near as good as everyone expected. They have on paper what looks a pretty good batting line-up, but they are struggling to find an opening partner for Alastair Cook. You have Root and Bairstow and then the elongated batting order with Stokes, Buttler and Woakes coming down the order you would have thought that they would have been producing well over 300 runs in every innings. It hasn't done that so you have to say that the England batting line-up has not stood up as well as everyone will have been hoping.

PakPassion.net: So what's wrong with the England batting line-up?

Michael Holding: They've come up against some pretty good bowling by the Indians. This Indian bowling attack has shown that they can produce in this country. England have pretty much ruled the roost over most countries that have visited England because their bowling attack has been pretty much superior to anything that has toured England most of the time. But this time the Indian bowling attack is proving to be equal and sometimes even looking better than the England bowling attack as a complete unit.

PakPassion.net: What are your thoughts on the role of Moeen Ali in the England Test team?

Michael Holding: I think Moeen Ali played a good role in the England Test team when he was picked as a spinner who could bat. Now it seems to me that Adil Rashid is the preferred specialist spin-bowling option. It's difficult to see Moeen coming into the team primarily as a batsman. Now if Adil Rashid and Moeen Ali are both going to be picked then the selectors are thinking of playing 2 spinners which would mean getting rid of a seam bowler. But now as we approach Autumn, I expect the seamers to come into play more than the spinners. You can play two spinners in June or July in England but August going into September I would suspect that the seamers would be more valuable than two spinners.

PakPassion.net: How impressed have you been with the Indian pace-bowlers on the current tour of England?

Michael Holding: They have done a very good job and that is even without one of their better bowlers Bhuvneshwar Kumar. They are producing more fast bowlers now because they are preparing better pitches back home in domestic cricket and for some international matches. For some international matches they play at home, they still produce turning pitches because of the opposition. If you don't produce good pitches to encourage fast bowlers, then you are not going to produce fast bowlers. Yes, the Indian pace-bowlers are doing a lot of hard work and people are speculating that they are now eating differently but the pitches play a huge part in the development of fast bowlers. In the Caribbean, we do not produce many fast bowlers in Guyana or Trinidad and that is because of the nature of the pitches in those countries. It's nothing to do with working hard or eating whatever you are eating, it's down to encouraging youngsters on pitches that say yes, if I go out and try hard I will get results and I can be satisfied bowling on these surfaces. If that is not the case, then forget it. India have changed their attitude to pitches at home and that's why they aren't just producing better fast bowlers, but they are also producing better cricketers because when they play on better pitches at home, then they go overseas, it's not a surprise or shock when they play on the pitches they are getting abroad.

PakPassion.net: What are your thoughts on Hardik Pandya?

Michael Holding: Put it this way, he had a good performance in the third Test match but as the saying goes, one sparrow doesn't make a summer. But, he is young, that gives him every opportunity to learn and to develop. When I saw him in South Africa and people were telling me he is the next Kapil Dev, I told them give me a break. He's nowhere near the next Kapil Dev. But give him a chance as a young man to develop and let's see what happens. In the entire first Test match against England he bowled only 10 overs. In the second Test match he bowled only 17 overs in the whole match. Now if the captain or the hierarchy thought he was an outstanding all-rounder then he would have bowled more overs than 10 and 17 respectively. But they have faith in his skill and ability that he will grow in the job. Then what you would hope is that people given opportunities will grow into a job just like England's Ollie Pope who hasn't done much so far for England but people who have seen him in domestic cricket think they have the skill and the ability and the character to do well in Test cricket, so one would hope that he too will get the opportunity to grow into the job. So we will see how these youngsters develop, but people calling Pope the next David Gower or Graham Gooch would be ridiculous. Give them time to grow into the job and develop.

PakPassion.net: So much has been said and written about Virat Kohli, but what make him such a great batsman?

Michael Holding: There are many things you need to become a great batsman. One is that you obviously have to have the skill. Secondly, you have to have good temperament. He has both in abundance. He has a lot of skill and he has great temperament. Nothing worries him, even when he was batting in the first 2 Tests against England when his team was struggling at various points, he did not look worried and he looked as if he was in control of the situation. A ball would go past the edge of his bat and you would see him smiling because he has that great temperament to handle situations and the pressure and use his skills to produce the goods. He's a great player, he is confident, he believes in himself. He reminds me a lot of Viv Richards, his belief, on top of skill, with great temperament. He has all of those things.

PakPassion.net: Do you believe that captaincy will get the best out of Kohli or will it be a hindrance to him?

Michael Holding: I don't think it will hamper him. I hope that he will grow into the job. He is very exuberant and emotional as captain very much like Viv Richards was on the field. He gave everything for West Indies and he always wanted West Indies do well, but as time went on, Viv tended to relax in the job of captain and I would think and hope that Virat Kohli will do the same. Because when you relax in a job, the people around you relax as well. If you as captain are on tenterhooks, then the people around you are also on tenterhooks and you don't want that in a team. You want people around you to relax and enjoy while they are performing at their very best.

PakPassion.net: What are your thoughts on the introduction of 100 ball cricket?

Michael Holding: What on earth is that? I am not interested in this, I don't even want to know what this is. They can do whatever they like with this format, I have no interest at all in it.

PakPassion.net: Are you worried about the future of Test cricket, given that so many other formats are coming on the scene?

Michael Holding: If people don't see that the future of Test cricket is in grave danger then they are either blind or don't want to see it. I warned about the future of Test cricket many years ago and it's obvious that there are huge problems with Test cricket. No Test match lasts 5 days any more, people do not know how to bat for long periods or how to build an innings. Look at Ollie Pope and the opportunity he got and how he was out. I would hope he would learn but in the past, people coming into Test cricket would not have to learn how to build a Test innings as they will have learnt that previously. They may have to learn how to adapt to Test cricket, to understand that this is another step up and how to adjust to that, but they would not have had to learn that they don't have to play at every ball.

PakPassion.net: Is four-day cricket the way forward for Test cricket?

Michael Holding: No. I don't see how four-day cricket can be thought of as the way forward in Tests just because Test matches are ending early. All you are doing is catering for the slide that is already taking place. So if you are now having four-day Test cricket you are telling everybody you only have four days, so what is that mindset. All it will mean is that tours get shortened and more T20Is are added to the schedule. It won't be a case of players getting more rest due to four-day Tests, it will just mean more T20Is.

PakPassion.net: What a brilliant servant James Anderson has been for English cricket.

Michael Holding: Jimmy Anderson in England is a very dynamic bowler. A great seam bowler who when he gets his conditions, he is a master. I've seen him develop over the years and I've not seen anyone better over the years that has been able to do it for as long as he has done it. I've seen a few good swing bowlers like Terry Alderman coming to England and bowling beautifully because he had such control and he swung the ball. But year after year, Jimmy Anderson has done it in England. After a while, you almost take what Jimmy is doing for granted because you expect him to do it and that just shows you how great he has been. When you have a water tap at home, you don't expect to wait for the water to come out, so you take it for granted that the water will come out. When you turn the tap on and there is no water that is a shock and that is the same for Jimmy Anderson. When he doesn't perform the way you expect him to, then it's a great shock. And that can be a good thing, but it can also be a bad thing. He has been a great servant for English cricket especially in England. He is the best bowler I have ever seen over an extended period of time, as far as swing bowling is concerned.

PakPassion.net: Who do you see as the front-runners for next year's World Cup?

Michael Holding: One-Day cricket is so unpredictable, it's so difficult to tell. The top teams at the moment are the normal teams that you would expect to be at the top, Pakistan, India, England, South Africa and Australia. One-Day cricket is a matter of who plays well on the day. The last World Cup had a few shocks, the one before that had even more shocks. So it's really difficult at the moment to single out one particular team that is better than the rest.

Jokes aside Holding keeping it real like always. His comparison of Kolhi with Viv is spot on and I have felt that way many a times. Kolhi isn't the next Tendulkar, he's better, he is the next Viv Richards.

I as a Pakistani fan will say that Kohli is heads and shoulders above Tendulkar. I don't care if he beats SRTs records or not. The guy is a freak. To average nearly 58+ plus, and that too coming in at the 1 down position for the majority of one's career, is unheard of.

England will miss the services of Cook as time goes on, I don't see a solid replacement for him currently.

I can comment if I want to, I do not need your approval. Also, I am not interested in how you rate Viv and Kohli and in what order.

Moreover, you do not need to watch a player to form a opinion. No man alive has watched Bradman/Hobbs/Sobers/Trueman etc. play, but that does not deter them from rating them.

I was actually commenting on their playing style. From what I have seen, read and heard about Viv, I would compare him more to someone like Pietersen.

I saw Ponting, and I think Kohli is very similar in terms of his playing style, attitude and overall demeanor. However, I would argue that Kohli is a better player.

Kohli has entered the league of Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting and Viv as one of the best batsmen of the last 30-40 years. That much is beyond any dispute, but his position within that league is certainly up for debate and down to personal preference.

Viv Richards inspired fear in the opposition, Kohli doesn't inspire fear where he trashes the opposition bowlers but he is super consistent

That is where I think Pietersen was more of a modern Viv than Kohli. He was the most destructive batsman in the world on his day, and he had a fear factor that even the more consistent players did not possess.

Viv I think was better because he was equally destructive (if not more) but also more consistent.

Kohli is a different type of player. He might not blow you away, but he will grind you down with ruthless consistency. He is a run scoring machine.

Don't think Kohli is like either Viv or ponting . They could bat with freedom because they played in lineups which had the likes of Lloyd,greenidge,Haynes and Langer/Hayden/Martyn/Waugh s/Gilly. The likes of Warner/Sehwag/Gilly were more like what Viv used to bat considering the pace at which they accumulated runs. Or someone like AB could be considered the modern Viv.

Jokes aside Holding keeping it real like always. His comparison of Kolhi with Viv is spot on and I have felt that way many a times. Kolhi isn't the next Tendulkar, he's better, he is the next Viv Richards.

I personally don't see any similarity between Kohli and Viv. Viv was an intimidator who had an amazing hand eye. Kohli is a grafter, he builds his innings accordingly to situation like his predecessors before him ala SRT. If any batsmen that comes close to Kohli in batting style it is Ponting...

The Viv you saw is the same one that we can see on YouTube. So why don't you tell us what is so special about his batting that you keep harping about in every other thread and predictably bolt from the thread when challenged?( which is what you will do now )

I personally don't see any similarity between Kohli and Viv. Viv was an intimidator who had an amazing hand eye. Kohli is a grafter, he builds his innings accordingly to situation like his predecessors before him ala SRT. If any batsmen that comes close to Kohli in batting style it is Ponting...

.... yeah. I don't get the Sir Viv comparison either. Once the Antiguan was in he was unstoppable. The only more recent comparison to Sir Viv is Lara, or (less often) Pietersen.

Different eras bro, I can agree with Robert that Viv was ruthless as a bat which Kohli is not, they are totally different batsmen.

You are right about the ERAs in this ERA all cricketers from top countries are Professionals with a legal contract signed with their respective boards. This wasnt the case in the 70s and 80s. And then there is the fact that majority of the worlds best bowlers were in the WI team.

So in light of the above ... the next question is how do you define ruthlessness ?

He was far ahead of his time, that's the reason why he is so highly rated by critics. But if you go by SR (Tests), his SR was 69. Both Sehwag and Gilchrist have an SR of above 80. It's laughable to say Viv was far more destructive than both of them. Anyone who does so is because of nostalgia. But the thing that makes Viv stand out is that no player during his time came even close to the way he dominated bowlers, keeping in mind his consistency as evident by his average of 50.

And before someone mentions about bowling attacks, I'm speaking purely of domination. I'm absolutely not comparing Viv with Sehwag or Gilchrist.

If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnít arrived yet: Viv Richards

That is where I think Pietersen was more of a modern Viv than Kohli. He was the most destructive batsman in the world on his day, and he had a fear factor that even the more consistent players did not possess.

Viv I think was better because he was equally destructive (if not more) but also more consistent.

Kohli is a different type of player. He might not blow you away, but he will grind you down with ruthless consistency. He is a run scoring machine.

I think Kohli scores higher than Ponting. Ponting's form dipped badly from 2007 onwards when all his super star players retired and when the pressures on him as the team's sole batsman increased. It is one thing to score tons of runs when there is not much pressure on you when you know there are another 6-7 reliable match winners to follow and another story when the team's entire hopes lie on you. Plus Ponting could not bat in India to save his life and has a poor record on dustbowls. Kohli for me has mostly answered all questions with his performances all over the world.

On the Subcontinent I would say so. But Sir Viv would not have been exposed against the moving ball by Anderson in England. He was a master of that type of bowling.

Sehwag's first tour of ENG and SA were stellar, he finished the series with decent avgs, facing guys like Simon Jones, Pollock, etc... Once he lost his hand eye he was garbage outside the subcontinent.

Sehwag's first tour of ENG and SA were stellar, he finished the series with decent avgs, facing guys like Simon Jones, Pollock, etc... Once he lost his hand eye he was garbage outside the subcontinent.

Sehwag's first tour of ENG and SA were stellar, he finished the series with decent avgs, facing guys like Simon Jones, Pollock, etc... Once he lost his hand eye he was garbage outside the subcontinent.

Got worked out maybe. I see he failed in the third test of his first England tour.

Ohh right, forgot he wasn't supposed to fail in any innings during his first overseas tour of a country... Unless it was Viv spanking around an avg bowler like Botham who was a nobody vs the Windies, not the case with the better quality bowlers which Sehwag faced in ENG during his first tour there.. Still finished the series with a good avg....

Ohh right, forgot he wasn't supposed to fail in any innings during his first overseas tour of a country... Unless it was Viv spanking around an avg bowler like Botham who was a nobody vs the Windies, not the case with the better quality bowlers which Sehwag faced in ENG during his first tour there.. Still finished the series with a good avg....

Funny, I watched Botham take an eightfer against WI.

Iíd take a young Botham over anyone England had produced since. Fastest man to 200 wickets, average 24. Plus Bob Willis and Derek Underwood who would walk into any England side Sehwag faced.

The nausea you're feeling is coming from one particular camp only, @MenInG

So many living cricketers played with Viv and have seen Kohli as well. Why are Indian fans jumping around over one comment by a former great? Just shows the massive inferiority complex Indian fans suffer from. It can only be that a former fast bowling great something India has never produced and never will is praising their batsman.

PP's own self proclaimed sharpshooter and defender of Islam and Pakistan.

Sehwag's first tour of ENG and SA were stellar, he finished the series with decent avgs, facing guys like Simon Jones, Pollock, etc... Once he lost his hand eye he was garbage outside the subcontinent.

Viv was garbage too once he lost his hand eye. At his peak years though, he wasnít bothered by any sort of bowling be it pace, bounce, swing or spin. His away record is impeccable. Moreover he scored those runs at brisk pace without helmet on wickets that are much quicker than today

Don't think Kohli is like either Viv or ponting . They could bat with freedom because they played in lineups which had the likes of Lloyd,greenidge,Haynes and Langer/Hayden/Martyn/Waugh s/Gilly. The likes of Warner/Sehwag/Gilly were more like what Viv used to bat considering the pace at which they accumulated runs. Or someone like AB could be considered the modern Viv.

Viv would have made more runs had he played in WI team that Lara did. With all the great players around him he didn’t always focus like he should. He was good enough to average in 60-70 but then what fun would it be??

History would have been much poorer if Viv had taken the “professional” approach!

I watched Sehwag in that 2006 tour to South Africa and he pretty much had one of the worst series an opener can have in those conditions. He was absolutely clueless, so Sehwag had massive issues against swing and seam even at age of 28.

One century at young age is not enough to make up for it. The averages of 20, 25 and 27 in NZ, SA and England speaks up for all that can be said about him. No doubt one of the greatest ever in Asia and very good in Australia and WI.

Btw, he was dropped during that 2006-07 period due to his poor form. I dont expect an ATG player to be dropped from his team because of bad form and that too halfway of his career.

Iíd take a young Botham over anyone England had produced since. Fastest man to 200 wickets, average 24. Plus Bob Willis and Derek Underwood who would walk into any England side Sehwag faced.

You saw him take an 8fer against the WI lol.... That's all the accolades you have for one of the greatest cricketers ENG ever created vs the worlds best team in 20 odd test matches????? Botham avgd 32 with the ball in ENG and 39 in WI, I am not even going to talk about his batting vs the WI, he looked like a deer in front of headlights, he was terrible.... Yeah he may have been the macdaddy vs other teams but sorry dude, he wasn't good enough against the best and imo if you are not good enough vs the best you are not worthy....

I personally don't see any similarity between Kohli and Viv. Viv was an intimidator who had an amazing hand eye. Kohli is a grafter, he builds his innings accordingly to situation like his predecessors before him ala SRT. If any batsmen that comes close to Kohli in batting style it is Ponting...

Neither Virat or Tendulkar are grafters , though I agree Virat is very different to Viv .

Having watched both guys "live" i can see some parallel. There used to be a joke about Richards. Even his defensive shot would go to long on. His defense was always a push. There is one thing i find common is both don't waste bad deliveries. But i have to say Richards did have the advantage of someone like Greenidge/Haynes before him and someone like Lloyd, Gomez later Richardson after him. There are couple of tests that come to my mind. One 1987 Delhi test. A bizzarre test at best. India shot out for 75 first morning and Windies reduced to 29/6 later 49/7 before they got to 127. In the 2nd innings Vengsarkar batted over 7 hours that too with injury to his hand to make a masterclass 100. With 275 to chase in the last innings Windies was precariously placed at 112/4 Arshad Ayub was getting purchase with his fastish off breaks. Richards put his head down and constructed one of the controlled innings. He finished with a strike rate close to 100 and helped Windies chased without a sweat. Another test at Kingston which was one of the most boring test given that both INdia and West indies scored at 2 runs per over in the first 3 innings. With rain washing out 4th day, Windies just had about 28 overs to get to 176. Given the slow scoring rate we all thought it would be a certain draw as only mandatory overs were left. They won in 26 overs !! Richards absolutely destroyed the bowling albeit it was some low quality bowling by Mohinder, Shastri. Richards played to win game. I see that trait in Kohli. He wants to win the game. He is not happy with scoring runs in one innings and goes missing in the 2nd innings. Kohli is a genuine match winner. Sadly atrocious batting line up let him down in this series. I would see him surpassing Sachin soon in that aspect. Kohli = Dravid + Laxman + Tendulkar. He has all those traits.

Today is only the 6th time in his international career that Virat Kohli has been dismissed for a golden duck:3 times versus EnglandOnce versus West IndiesOnce versus AustraliaOnce versus South Africa#Cricket

He was fielding for Somerset and stopped the ball just inside the point boundary. He picked the ball up, dropped it on purpose, pretending to midfield. The two batters had turned for a third run. They stopped and looked at Sir Viv. He grinned and motioned for them to run, to take his arm on.

Though both were a third of the way down the pitch, each retreated to their crease. They knew that his throw from the boundary would beat either of them, and that he would most likely hit one stump from seventy yards.

With a flick of his wrist, throwing sidearm, the great man buzzed it in. Flat it went, straight into the keeper’s gloves.

"Richards could not wait until morning, he had to take on Thomson now. Even though Thomson struck him on the body with a steeply rising ball, he produced some streaks of pure gold: he drove Thomson off the backfoot over mid-off for four: hooked him for six through midwicket: hooked him for four: lifted him overhead for another four: Richards was trying to smash everything out of sight, Thomson started to bowl no-balls. Then off the last delivery of a nine-ball over which had cost 19 runs, Richards top-edged another wild hook and was brilliantly caught by Wayne Clark down by his ankles at long leg for 23. Was this the most dramatic encounter between a batsman and fast bowler of modern times? Show me one better!"

So much drooling over a inconsequential innings.

This is the sort of mindless embellishing that is the reason for the stature of many a OLD ERA players. Its like people believed in anything and everything that was said. Perhaps the lack of media coverage and no easy access to information lead to this situation. But what prevents people in this day and age to keep believing in the same nonsense ?

He was fielding for Somerset and stopped the ball just inside the point boundary. He picked the ball up, dropped it on purpose, pretending to midfield. The two batters had turned for a third run. They stopped and looked at Sir Viv. He grinned and motioned for them to run, to take his arm on.

Though both were a third of the way down the pitch, each retreated to their crease. They knew that his throw from the boundary would beat either of them, and that he would most likely hit one stump from seventy yards.

With a flick of his wrist, throwing sidearm, the great man buzzed it in. Flat it went, straight into the keeper’s gloves.

Magical.

You heard a story and you instantly believed it to be fact and are now trying to propagate it ( perhaps adding your own masala to it ).

This is the difference between me and you. I will simply not believe in it until some basic fact checking is done to corroborate the events. This is why you find yourselves running out of threads everytime you try to convince fact and logic bound people of the "Magical" prowess of old ERA cricketers. ( See my previous post for example )

Another favourite Richards story of mine - Lordís I think it was, in 1991.

Sir Viv had lost a bit by then - perhaps his vision was starting to go? WI were chasing a small target to win the test in a tight-fought series. DeFreitas took three quick top-order wickets, and England focused on an unlikely victory.

Sir Viv came in to a tense situation and batted carefully, and he got WI over the line.

A score of young black chaps invaded the pitch, lifting the great man high on their shoulders. They bore him to the Pavilion at a canter. Richardsí bat was raised, fist punching the air. He was their champion.

A moment of burning, furious pride and love. Pure theatre, that only test cricket seems to provide.

He was far ahead of his time, that's the reason why he is so highly rated by critics. But if you go by SR (Tests), his SR was 69. Both Sehwag and Gilchrist have an SR of above 80. It's laughable to say Viv was far more destructive than both of them. Anyone who does so is because of nostalgia. But the thing that makes Viv stand out is that no player during his time came even close to the way he dominated bowlers, keeping in mind his consistency as evident by his average of 50.

exactly. Also plenty of batsmen had the skill to dominate bowling attacks but chose not to go that route due to team interests. Virat Kohli is one such. Anyone who thinks otherwise is soo blinded by nostalgia and bias that its hilarious to see them argue by presenting fictional stories to make their case.

And before someone mentions about bowling attacks, I'm speaking purely of domination. I'm absolutely not comparing Viv with Sehwag or Gilchrist.

In Viv's ERA there was NO South Africa and NZ, SL were borderline minnows and most importantly - majority of the best bowlers of his ERA where in his own team. Therefore Sehwag without a shadow of doubt faced bowling attacks of far higher caliber than Viv.

He is Ponting part 2 only more arrogant.. Shots are similar on the field and when dealing with the media... I hate the media but dont agree with the way Kohli handles them.. There is only SRT and he is king, sorry Kohli will never be better than him. SRT is king of kings amen....

He is Ponting part 2 only more arrogant.. Shots are similar on the field and when dealing with the media... I hate the media but dont agree with the way Kohli handles them.. There is only SRT and he is king, sorry Kohli will never be better than him. SRT is king of kings amen....

Neither of the 3 including Kohli are cut out for captaincy or mentoring other players of their team.

Richards was batting in the Lordís test. Botham has taken all three wickets to fall so far and was coming in much faster than usual, abandoning swing, going for pace and bounce.

He directed a series of bouncers at Richards. The Antiguan ducked and swayed, as two men were back for the hook and he had seen the Englishman get many batters out caught hooking.

Bothamís momentum was carrying him up the wicket. He and Richards locked eyes. Words were exchanged.

Botham turned to head back to his mark. Richards swaggered up the pitch behind him, chewing gum as ever. The Caribbeans in the crowd said WwwwwooooooooOOOOOH as though expecting the two champions to come to blows.

Richards reached the spot where the ball had just steeplejacked from. He patted the spot down with his bat. Turned and sauntered back to his mark.

Richards was good at hammering the mediocre English team of 80s. Unfortunately, that's not good enough.

Virat is already twice the batsman viv ever was, having played and owned some of the nastiest and quickest pacers and spinners around the world. In their own conditions. The body of work Virat has already established - and the breadth and depth of it - is something that Viv hasn't got a patch on.

Virat's real challenge is to surmount the Everest in the form of Tendulkar confronting him. Unfortunately for him, this would be a bridge too far. Still, it takes a colossus to be the best of his era and counted among the top three batsmen of ALL times.